THE LA RAZA CRIME TIDAL WAVE - “These figures do not attempt to allege that foreign
nationals in the country illegally commit more
crimes than other groups,” the report states. “It
simply identifies thousands of crimes that should
not have occurred and thousands of victims that
should not have been victimized because the
perpetrator should not be here.”
CHARLOTTE CUTHBERTSON

Saturday, August 24, 2019

AMERICAN FASCIST AND OPEN BORDERS GLOBALIST BILLIONAIRES
DAVID AND CHARLES KOCH…. Let them burn in hell!

In coming days, we’ll be reading about all the issues on
which David Koch, his brother and their comrades in arms have exerted influence
for their benefit and at the expense of ordinary people

Koch’s legacy is system of dark money MICHAEL HILTZIK The
passing of billionaire David Koch, announced Friday, already is inspiring retrospectives
about the noxious influence he and his brother Charles have had on government
policies — but it may be better to remember him for his real innovation in the
sphere of public discourse. That’s the creation of a network of moneyed donors
so potent and ubiquitous that the voice of the individual voter has been
drowned out. The Koch brothers’ individual efforts to undermine policies on
climate change and other problems are bad enough, but the system they pioneered
bodes even worse for the future of American democracy. And let’s not ignore
that this system has spread throughout American politics, with huge funding
networks on the right and the left. As muckrakers, including Jane Mayer and
Christopher Leonard, have documented, the Koch network — the brothers and
affiliated entities — spent some $900 million on political activities during
the 2016 electoral cycle. The money was not only the brothers’, but came from
like-minded millionaires and billionaires. But this army marched to the
brothers’ tunes. The siren call was for a world without regulation, justified
by casting doubt on science in climate change and healthcare, among other
topics, and fueled by pantsfuls of cash distributed through a vast web of
tax-exempt entities. “The Kochs, on their own, probably would not be able to
have the kind of influence they have,” Mayer said in a radio interview
following the 2016 publication of her book “Dark Money: The Hidden History of
the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right.” She added: “What they’ve
done is kind of a magic trick. They’ve attracted around them — they’ve
purposefully built what they call an unprecedented network ... about 400 other
extraordinarily wealthy conservatives with them to create a kind of a
billionaire caucus.” The harvest of the Koch brothers’ innovation is an
American political system that lies supine at the feet of moneyed interests.
The majority of lawmakers and presidents no longer even pay lip service to the
idea of getting money out of politics or — perhaps more important — ending the
secrecy that cloaks the identities of contributors to the torrent of 8/24/2019
Los Angeles Times - eNewspaper
https://enewspaper.latimes.com/desktop/latimes/default.aspx?edid=3449d1cf-3529-46a0-a3fe-ea5906ab8639
2/3 cash.

Why is Washington unable to pass legislation to fight climate
change or eradicate the lethal gun culture, despite clear evidence that a
majority of ordinary Americans are desperate to see action? Because big money
is on the other side, and the Koch brothers were among the pioneers. The Koch
network includes the libertarian Cato Institute, which the brothers co-founded,
and nonprofits such as Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Partners. They’ve
spread their views via funding for university programs coast to coast, such as
the libertarian Mercatus Center at George Mason University, a source of
ideological attacks on Social Security and anti-poverty programs, including
Medicaid, school lunches and breakfasts, and food stamps, which are almost
invariably depicted as founts of fraud and waste. (George Mason renamed its
law school after the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia after receiving
a donation of $10 million from the Koch brothers and $20 million donated via
the Koch-funded Federalist Society, which also vets conservative lawyers and
judges for appointment to federal courts.) Koch donations to academic
institutions typically come with ideological blinders attached, as when the
University of Utah accepted a $10-million donation from the Charles Koch
Foundation to establish a free-market economics program to counter the
ostensibly Marxian bent of the university’s economics department. The Koch
network funds organizations such as the State Policy Network and the American
Legislative Exchange Council, which promote conservative legislation, such as
tax cuts, deregulation and “stand your ground” firearms laws at the state
level. The Koch network’s enduring concern has been the regulation of fossil
fuels to address climate change. As Leonard observes in his just-published book
“Kochland: The Secret History of Koch Industries and Corporate Power in
America,” these regulations struck at the heart of the natural resources
business of Koch Industries, the brothers’ closely held corporation. The Cato
Institute first moved to foment doubt about climate change science with a 1991
seminar titled “Global Environmental Crises: Science or Politics?” The seminar
featured “scientists who questioned the prevailing view that humankind’s carbon
emissions caused the Earth to warm,” Leonard reports. Among them was Richard S.
Lindzen of MIT, who was quoted in the seminar brochure stating there is “very
little evidence at all” for “the notion that global warming is a fact and will
be catastrophic.” The attendees were feted at the White House by staffers for
George H.W. Bush, whose announcement that he would consider signing a treaty to
limit carbon emissions had inspired Cato to launch the seminar. The Koch
network’s reach is illustrated by an agenda for a 2014 “donor summit” sponsored
by their Freedom Partners and published by the Nation and subsequently by
Kochdocs.org, which collects documents pertinent to the network. 8/24/2019

Among the speakers were then-congressman and now U.S. Sen.
Tom Cotton (R-Ark); long-term GOP official Marc Short, who later would be
director of legislative affairs for President Trump and chief of staff to Vice
President Mike Pence; and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who
was then in the minority. The agenda topics included “Saving America: Our Fight
to Advance Freedom and Reverse the Country’s Decline” and “Energy: Changing the
Narrative.” “The Kochs have built kind of an assembly line to manufacture
political change,” Mayer said in her radio interview. “It includes think tanks,
which produce papers. It includes advocacy groups, that advocate for policies.
And it includes giving money to candidates.” On all three fronts, she stated,
they push climate change denial. In coming days, we’ll be reading about all
the issues on which David Koch, his brother and their comrades in arms have
exerted influence for their benefit and at the expense of ordinary people.
Let’s not overlook that the financial machine they created also prompted the
creation of a financial machine in opposition to their interests. The total
effect is to create an electoral system awash with self-interested money, with
no countervailing pressure. We are all paying the price, and will continue to
do so into the limitless future. Keep up to date with Michael Hiltzik.
Follow @hiltzikm on Twitter, see his Facebook

President Donald Trump’s citizenship director told a Texas business group that House Speaker Paul Ryan “submarined” the best chance for immigration reform because he wanted illegal immigration.

“Let’s not forget … when [Rep.] Paul Ryan was the speaker, Paul Ryan submarined the best opportunity we had legislatively when [judiciary chairman Rep.] Bob Goodlatte’s bill … came through,” Ken Cuccinelli told the Texas Public Policy Foundation on August 22.

Cuccinelli, who is the acting director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency, said, “We had leadership there that defended the status quo. They were the Chamber of Commerce Congress. They wanted illegal immigration.”

In contrast, President Trump is following through on his promises and is giving American voters a clear choice in 2020, he said:

I actually think the 2020 election can help solve that problem. I believe when you run on things, and people know ‘This is what I get if I vote for X, if this party becomes the majority, I get this bill’ …. [then you get] good politics and good policy.

“Not enough people will challenge their own leadership in the GOP to beat them down when they are wrong,” said Cuccinelli, a populist conservative from Virginia.

Goodlatte retired from Congress in 2018. In December, he said that Ryan blocked his bill by dividing the GOP votes between two reform bills: “That is just not a good strategyand I complained about it at the time. I said ‘You’ve got to narrow this down to one bill and then work really hard to get the members to vote for that one bill.’”

Ryan said in November 2018 that he preferred a rival bill, sponsored by GOP Rep. Chris Curbelo, who was defeated in the November election.

On immigration, I really liked—I call it “the Curbelo bill,” it was Goodlatte II — the immigration compromise bill that I put on the floor in July, which satisfied the President’s four pillars.” he said.

“Our goal is to not cut legal immigration,” Rep. Carlos Curbelo told RollCall.com on June 2018. The number of illegals who get green cards from the amnesty should be “as high a number as possible,” he said.

Curbelo repeated his demand, telling TheHill.com that “some visas may be shifted towards employment visas, but our goal is to not cut legal immigration.”

The Goodlatte bill would have cut legal immigration by ending the visa lottery, provided a work permit amnesty to just the 700,000 illegals who are registered in the DACA program, and ensured immigration cuts, said Rosemary Jenks, policy director of NumbersUSA.

It also included much careful language to hinder fraud and to prevent pro-migration judges from hijacking the bill’s limited amnesty for their own goals, said Jenks, who opposed the bigger Ryan bill.

Ryan’s support for the Curbelo bill allowed 41 GOP legislators to vote no on the Goodlatte bill when it came up for a June vote.

“If it has been the only bill offered, it might have passed,” Goodlatte said. “We were 20, 21 votes short,” said Goodlatte. The [bill] would have passed “if we had gotten half of [the GOP ‘no’ voters] to join with us, we would have gotten there,” he said.

The US has a fast-growing population of roughly 630,000 illegal migrants from India, mixed among the temporary contract-work population of at least 1.5 million Indians. That's great for business & govt's, but bad for Americans' families & employees. http://bit.ly/2zfNggO

Immigration is a government economic strategy which seeks to stimulate economic growth and stock prices by inflating the supply of labor and consumers.

Each year, roughly four million young Americans join the workforce after graduating from high school or university. This total includes about 800,000 Americans who graduate with skilled degrees in business or health care, engineering or science, software, or statistics.

But the federal government then imports about 1.1 million legal immigrants and refreshes a resident population of roughly 1.5 million white-collar visa workers — including approximately 1 million H-1B workers and spouses — and about 500,000 blue-collar visa workers. The government also prints out more than one million work permits for foreigners, tolerates about eight million illegal workers, and rarely punishes companies for employing the hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants who sneak across the border or overstay their legal visas each year.

This policy of inflating the new labor supply boosts stock values for investors by ensuring that employers do not have to compete in a free market for American workers with offers of higher wages and better working conditions.

This policy of flooding the market with cheap, foreign, white-collar graduates and blue-collar labor shifts enormous wealth from young employees towards older investors, even as it also widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, and hurts children’s schools and college educations.

The cheap-labor economic strategy also pushes Americans away from high-tech careers and sidelines millions of marginalized Americans, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.

2020 Census Citizenship Controversy Exposes True Open Borders Agenda

As usual, the dustup about the census including a question about citizenship has nothing to do with what the loony left claims as their motivation to exclude it. They say it’s all about being sensitive to the hurt feelings and paranoia of people who are illegally present in the U.S. And, by the way, asking the question it is not a Donald Trump trick to ferret out those folks who are hiding under their blankets, afraid that the next knock on the door will be the jackbooted ICE agents, come to drag them from their beds and put them on boxcars headed for concentration camps.

A brief history lesson here. The Constitution of the United States directs the President to conduct a Census every ten years, and that has been done without controversy since 1790. And with rare exceptions, the question on citizenship has been part of it from the beginning. Yet, its inclusion in the 2020 Census has become controversial. The reasons for the opposition to the citizenship question tell us a lot about the declining health of our American constitutional republic.

The vehement opposition to the 2020 Census question on citizenship is a symptom of a deep divide in the body politic, a chasm that only grows wider and deeper as politicians postpone a decision over the meaning of the Constitution's opening words, "We the People."

There is a chasm as wide as the Grand Canyon separating individuals who believe that "We the People" means we the citizens of the United States and those who believe it means, we the global citizens who temporarily inhabit this territory. To one group having an accurate count of both citizens and noncitizens resident in each state is vital to the constitutional purposes of the Census, but to the "global citizen" contingent that count is not only unnecessary, it is slanderous, racist and, well -- undemocratic!

It is important to understand that this debate over the 2020 Census's citizen/noncitizen numbers is not a debate over counting illegal immigrants residing in the United States. This controversy goes deeper than the debate over whether the official U.S. Census estimate of 11.3 million illegal aliens resident in the country is accurate or woefully inaccurate.

The political resistance to the traditional citizenship question as part of the decennial Census derives its passion and intensity from the ideological goal of transforming the nature of political representation in our republic. In that world, an elected representative in any city council, school board, county commission, state legislature, Board of Regents, or the U. .Congress, is duty bound to represent any resident of his or her district with the same passion and integrity whether that resident be a citizen, a Chinese or German foreign student at a local university, a legal resident alien born in Egypt or an illegal alien who swam across the Rio Grande. Should foreign students at the University of Colorado vote in Boulder city elections? Why not, if every "person" is entitled to "equal representation"?

The population count produced by the 2020 Census will be the foundation for Congress' adoption of revised apportionment of the 435 seats in Congress. Does a new apportionment based on new Census numbers mean a count based on all persons, all citizens, or something else? Such questions will be debated in Congress and litigated all the way to the Supreme Court before we know the answers, but the debate must begin with an accurate count in the Census. Will we get one?

When the national debate over illegal immigration and border security was heating up back in 2005 and 2006 in response to amnesty proposals in Congress, I was roundly criticized for suggesting the opposition to amnesty was rooted in opposition to secure borders. I was attacked by some prominent leaders of the Republican Party for saying that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce saw illegal aliens as cheap labor and the Democrat Party saw them as future Democratic voters.I take no pleasure in observing in 2019 that Democratic leaders in Congress are aggressively advocating open borders as a path to a permanent Democratic majority. And there is an even bigger picture that elitist leftists are trying to paint for us all. They want no borders, no allegiance to a nation state, no citizenship classification connected to a single country.

They want a kumbaya world of global citizens that can be governed by people who “know better.” Think I am wrong? Try to find a recent college or high school grad who can tell you what it means to be an American other than by saying it means abiding in a place called America. The members of what I call the Cult of Multiculturalism infect our schools, our media, and pop culture. The philosophy permeates the West -- its repercussions and can be seen playing out all over Europe.

Only a short decade ago, a world-famous Harvard political scientist, Samuel P. Huntington, wrote a landmark book aptly titled Who Are We? America’s National Identity Crisis. He believed that America's unprecedented achievements and unparalleled prosperity had their foundation in our nation's European heritage, a heritage under siege by the formidable forces of multiculturalism. So eliminating the citizenship question in the Census is a just another step down the road to the elitist utopia promised by Marx and Engels.

Eventually we will come to the step when jackbooted government agents really will be pulling people out of their beds and sending them off to “re-education” camps.” After all, some people might resist the America that Barack Obama promised to thoroughly transform.

Former U.S. Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), serves as Advisory Board Member for We Build The Wall. He was author of the famous Bush Era book called In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America's Border and Security.

House Democrats and 39 Republicans passed a plan to provide asylum in the United States to potentially millions of Venezuelans fleeing their socialist dictator.

In a 272 to 158 House vote on Thursday, every Democrat and 39 Republicans voted to create a Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program for Venezuela’s population — allowing nationals who are already in the U.S. to remain and incentivizing more to migrate.

Officials with the Trump administration previously voiced their opposition to the plan in an interview with Breitbart News.

“We would not want to open the floodgates for them,” an official said in March.

Leading the opposition against giving TPS to Venezuela’s population, Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) called the plan an effort to continue current U.S. national immigration policy that acts as “the world’s orphanage for children and adults alike.”

Brooks said:

This bill proposes a tsunami of people coming to our country who are ill-equipped to support themselves. And, let’s put that into the perspective of where we are a nation. We just blew through the $22 trillion debt mark earlier this year. This year, we are looking at a roughly $900 billion deficit. A deal that has been reached that will only increase our deficit by $2 trillion over the next two years pushing our debt up to $22 trillion. This is money we do not have, have to borrow to get, and cannot afford to pay back. [Emphasis added]

How does that relate to H.R. 549? Well, let me share some numbers with you. Sixty percent of households with a lawful immigrant in them are on welfare, living off the hard work of others. Seventy percent of illegal alien households are on welfare, living off the hard work of others here in the United States of America. [Emphasis added]

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a major donor the to the GOP establishment, urged Republicans to join Democrats in helping to pass TPS for Venezuelans.

“The Chamber applauds Representatives Soto and Diaz-Balart for leading the House effort to pass H.R. 549, which would allow many Venezuelans currently in the U.S. the opportunity to legally remain and work in the U.S. while Venezuela is in a state of crisis,” the Chamber’s Neil Bradley said in a statement. “The U.S. government should make it clear that Venezuelan nationals who pose no risk to the safety or security of the U.S. will not be sent back into harm’s way.”

TPS has become a quasi-amnesty for otherwise illegal aliens created under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990 (INA) that prevents the deportation of foreign nationals from countries that have suffered through famine, war, or natural disasters. Since the Clinton administration, TPS has been transformed into a de facto amnesty program as the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations have continuously renewed the program for a variety of countries.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

TRUMP’S CRAP ON BORDERS AND HIS PRETEND WALL IS ONLY ONE MORE TRUMP HOAX!

*

Only a complete fool would believe that Trump is any more for American Legal workers than the Democrat Party for Billionaires and Banksters!

The latest ad from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) asks Trump to reject the mass illegal and legal immigration policies supported by Wall Street, corporate executives, and most specifically, the GOP mega-donor Koch brothers.

*

Efforts by the big business lobby, Chamber of Commerce, Koch brothers, and George W. Bush Center include increasing employment-based legal immigration that would likely crush the historic wage gains that Trump has delivered for America’s blue collar and working class citizens.

*

A handful of Republican and Democrat lawmakers are continuing to tout a plan that gives amnesty to nearly a million illegal aliens in exchange for some amount of funding for President Trump’s proposed border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

MAGA vs. the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

The general public typically equates the Chamber of Commerce with local Mom and Pop businesses in their area which meet for networking and mutual support in local chapters across the country. This is erroneous. According to theHill:

While local chambers cater to the needs of car dealers and restaurant owners, the national Chamber operates as the lobbying arm of large corporations that have never met a big government program they did not like.

They are weapons dealers pushing billion-dollar battleships and telecommunication lobbyists protecting slow Internet at the world's highest prices. They are lobbyists for pharmaceutical companies, big banks, and Wall street traders who treat the American people as gullibles to be fleeced without mercy.

Even seasoned politicians are susceptible to having misconceptions about the Chamber. Former U.S. senator Jim Demint admits he naively thought it was lobbying for free enterprise and creating a better business environment for everybody. Now he says, "I pronounce them part of the swamp." Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich), a conservative, adds, "I believe in free markets and am against cronyism and corporate welfare, and they [the U.S. Chamber of Commerce] support those things."

So what is the USCC? It is a business lobbying group that represents 80% of the Fortune 100 companies and is by far the largest interest group in Washington. According the Wall Street Journal, the Chamber spent $125 million in lobbying in 2014 and $95 million last year. This dwarfs the spending of any other interest group. One tactic the Chamber uses to swell its revenue is to solicit money from big international companies to promote specific goals. Since donor names are not public, the Chamber can pursue controversial fights without identifying the firms behind the effort.

The Chamber of Commerce and its president Thomas Donohue came into conflict with Donald Trump and his America First platform very early on. For 18 months during the runup to the 2016 election, the Chamber spared no effort to demonize Trump. In doing so, the Chamber was carrying water for the Hillary Clinton campaign. Donohue and company figured they could better deal with Hillary than Trump in the Oval Office. In this, the Chamber was exactly right.

The big hangups the Chamber and its client base had against Donald Trump involved immigration, trade, and tariffs. Adhering to its corporate masters’ call for a continuous supply of cheap labor, the Chamber lobbies for more immigration and resists tight border controls. Trade is much the same. Past trade pacts have allowed Wall Street to grow obscenely rich in the outsourcing of American jobs to third-world countries for sake of the bottom line of the multinationals. In the process, over a million ordinary Americans were left holding the bag.

All this is still playing out today. The president is striving to adjust the unfair trading arrangements that the political class, in cahoots with the big money interests on Wall Street, have saddled the U.S. with. But Trump and his trade team of Robert Lighthizer, Wilbur Ross, Steven Mnuchin, and Larry Kudlow are fighting not just China, but what is effectively a Fifth Column here at home. It's composed of the likes of the Chamber of Commerce and a sizable portion of the political establishment, which is used to dipping its beak in special-interest money.

As to this latter point, just look at the breaking news of the dealings of Joe Biden's son, Hunter, with the Chinese government. Writing in the New YorkPost, Peter Schweizer outlines in detail the $1.5 private equity deal the younger Biden made with the Chinese while Biden was vice-president. And now, Joe Biden is out on the stump soft-peddling the damage China has done to the U.S. economy and downplaying its threat to us and pretending to be for the working man. You can't make this up.

It's important not to conflate Big Business (Wall Street) with small business (Main Street). Wall Street is the financial economy. It pushes paper around. For example, they write derivatives on real assets, say stocks, to the point where the value of derivatives traded is far greater than the assets they are based on.Investopedia says this: "The derivatives market is, in a word, gigantic -- often estimated at more than $1.2 quadrillion on the high end."

A quadrillion is 1,000 trillion. In dollar terms, a quadrillion is 15-times the GDP of the entire world.

Main Street actually makes and sells things. For over a generation or more, Big Biz has dominated Main Street. This is why the Midwest and other places across the U.S. are littered with closed factories and why middle-class wages stagnated. In many ways, the financial economy is parasitic on the real economy. In the 2016 election, Donald Trump represented Main Street while Clinton was in the pocket of the big money interests on Wall Street.

What this means is that what is good for Main Street will not be good for Wall Street and Big Biz, at least not in the short run. What benefits the American worker -- fair trade policy and tight immigration control -- will initially hurt Big Biz and Wall Street. And the hurt will continue until the financial economy is scaled back to its proper size and is no longer allowed to the tail that wags the American economic dog. Until then, MAGA is at war with Big Biz and the bought-and-paid-for political establishment. And this explains much of the resistance to Trump's tariffs and trade position.

A closing observation says a lot. Thomas Donohue, the president of the Chamber of Commerce, is 80 years old. His board is pushing him to retire. The replacement they are looking at is former Congressman Paul Ryan. A perfect fit given the Chamber's agenda.

Chamber of Commerce Demands More Immigration: ‘U.S. Is Out of People’

The United States Chamber of Commerce is vowing to continue fighting President Trump’s shaping of the Republican Party into a pro-U.S. worker party of blue collar working and middle class Americans.

In an interview with the Washington Post, numerous Chamber of Commerce officials said the organization’s corporate lobbying efforts would soon attempt to court more elected Democrats to support their economic libertarian agenda of more free trade and increased legal immigration.

“The GOP’s drift toward protectionism, nativism, and isolationism since Donald Trump took over the party in 2016 is also at odds with the Chamber’s longtime support for expanding free trade, growing legal immigration and investing in infrastructure,” the Poststory details.

Specifically, Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Tom Donahue said the U.S. needed more legal immigration so that corporations and business secure a never-ending flow of cheaper labor, claiming the country is “out of people.”

And they’re still looking to work with Trump even on areas where they’re not really in agreement, such as immigration. The Chamber advocates for protecting the “dreamers” from deportation and expanding rates of legal immigration. “The fundamental issue is that the United States of America is out of people,” said Donohue. “We have the lowest unemployment we’ve had in 65 years. We have brought more people back into the workforce and still have the lowest unemployment.” [Emphasis added]

Despite Donahue’s claims, at least 12 million Americans who want full-time jobs remain on the sidelines of the workforce. This includes 6.2 million Americans who are unemployed that want a job, 4.5 million Americans who are underemployed working part-time jobs, and 1.4 million Americans who continue to be entirely out of the workforce though they want full-time employment.

While millions remain on the sidelines of the workforce, the Chamber of Commerce has routinely advocated for increasing legal immigration levels as a boon to corporations while depressing job prospects and wages for America’s working and middle class. Already, about 1.5 million illegal and legal immigrants are admitted to the country every year, to the detriment of U.S. wages.

The Chamber of Commerce’s push to increase legal immigration levels is vastly out of step with Republican voters and American voters as a whole. Last year, nearly two-out-threeU.S. voters said they supported reducing legal immigration, while most recently about 43 percent of Republican voters said immigration hurts the country.

Extensive research by economists like George Borjas and analyst Steven Camarota has found that the country’s current mass legal immigration system — wherein 1.2 million mostly low-skilled workers are admitted annually — burdens U.S. taxpayers and America’s working and middle class while redistributing about $500 billion in wealth every year to major employers and newly arrived immigrants.

Borjas has previously called the country’s legal immigration system the “largest anti-poverty program” in the world at the expense of blue-collar Americans and middle-class taxpayers.

Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, has found that every one-percent increase in the immigrant composition of American workers’ occupations reduces their weekly wages by about 0.5 percent. This means the average native-born American worker today has his weekly wages reduced by perhaps 8.5 percent because of current legal immigration levels.

In a state like Florida, where immigrants make up about 25.4 percent of the labor force, American workers have their weekly wages reduced by about 12.5 percent. In California, where immigrants make up 34 percent of the labor force, American workers’ weekly wages are reduced by potentially 17 percent.

Likewise, every one-percent increase in the immigrant composition of low-skilled U.S. occupations reduces wages by about 0.8 percent. Should 15 percent of low-skilled jobs be held by foreign-born workers, it would reduce the wages of native-born American workers by perhaps 12 percent.

Though corporate interests and the open borders lobby have sought to sway Trump from his “America First” illegal and legal immigration agenda, senior advisor Jared Kushner recently said the president’s top priority in terms of the White House’s reform efforts is protecting Americans’ wages.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

///

Chamber of Commerce Considering Legal Action to Block Mexico Tariffs

AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

JOHN CARNEY

31 May 2019634

1:44

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups are considering ways to challenge the new tariffs on goods imported from Mexico.

The powerful U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which advocates for cheap labor policies and opposes American First trade initiatives, told reporters Friday that it is considering all options, including legal challenges, to thwart the Trump administration’s policy.

“We have no choice but to pursue every option available to push back,” Neil Bradley, executive vice president and chief policy officer at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said Friday.

President Donald Trump said Thursday that he will impose a 5 percent tariff on goods imported from Mexico if the Mexican government does not stem the flow of illegal immigrants from Central America.

Chamber of Commerce President and chief executive Tom Donahue told the Washington Post in April that the U.S. needed more legal immigration because the country is “out of people.” The chamber has pushed for legal protection for so-called “Dreamers” and led political resistance to efforts to deport more illegal border crossers.

The chamber began 2019 by opposing legislation that would have allowed President Donald Trump to impose reciprocal tariffs on specific foreign imports.

“The bill would effectively give the President unilateral authority to increase U.S. tariffs on imports from any foreign country,” Bradley wrote in a letter sent to many lawmakers on Capitol Hill. “The harm to Americans would be immediate: Tariffs are taxes, and they are paid by American families and American businesses.”

Sen. Cory Booker called for more low-skilled immigration Wednesday night as he tried to cut down Joe Biden in the Democrats’ 2020 race.

“I heard the vice president say that if you got a PhD., you can come right into this country,” Booker said, adding:

Well that’s playing into what the Republicans want, to pit some immigrants against other immigrants. We need to reform this whole immigration system and begin to be the country that says everyone has worth and dignity and this should be a country that honors everyone.

If implemented, Booker’s call for more low-skilled immigration would increase competition for blue-collar jobs and cheap apartments in New Jersey, so imposing additional economic pain on lower-skilled Americans in Booker’s home state. More migration would also add to the divide-and-rule diversity which hinders Americans from periodically uniting to curb the elites’ self-serving policies.

Republicans want to pit some immigrants against others. But we need to reform this whole immigration system and begin to be the country that says, “Everyone has worth and dignity, and this should be a country that honors everyone.” #DemDebate

Booker’s call for un-skilled immigration got plaudits from advocates for “diverse” immigration into the United States.

“That was solid immigration talk from Booker,” said Alex Merced, the “Latinx Vice Chair” of the Libertarian Party. “Merit based immigration is condescending and presumes government can determine our individual potential, I sure as hell don’t trust government to do that.”

“Booker speaking truth again on immigration,” tweeted Jonathan Capeheart, a member of the Washington Post‘s editorial board.

But Booker’s call for more unskilled immigration also got him a shout-out from Todd Schulte, who runs FWD.us, a cheap labor lobby shop for Mark Zuckerberg and other West Coast investors.

“Appreciate @CoryBooker,” said a tweet from Schulte. “Pointing out that this [immigration] section of the debate is being dominated by poor assumptions, bad framing and a lack of focus on many of the most critical aspects of immigration — not cutesy gotcha stuff that misses huge aspects of the debate.”

Schulte’s donors employ many foreign graduates, including both visa workers and immigrants. But his donors also have coherent economic reasons to oppose any cutbacks to the immigration of unskilled workers and family chain migrants, as urged by President Donald Trump’s 2018 “Four Pillars” plan.

Unskilled migrants serve as both cheap workers, extra consumers, and predictable renters. Their multi-sided value for investors is spotlighted by FWD.us’ support for DoorDash, which hires people to deliver food by auto, scooters, and bikes. In a September 2018 statement, the FWD.us investors denounced Trump’s plan to cut unskilled immigration into the United States, saying it would reduce immigrant-driven economic growth:

Immigration powers the American economy, and ensuring that immigrant families living here today can thrive means greater benefits for all U.S. residents and our children in the future. The earning potential of immigrants and their contributions to the labor-force and economy grows over time and over generations …

Tony Xu, the founder of DoorDash, embodies this story … in 2013 Tony founded DoorDash, an incredibly successful meal delivery service. Today, DoorDash is valued at $4 billion, using recent investment to expand into 1,200 new cities and to hire 250 new employees, in addition to over 100,000 part-time gigs already created for delivery drivers across the country.

DoorDash’s investors in FWD.us funders include Sequoia Capital, KPCB, SV Angel, CRV, and Y Combinator. In June 2019, Schulte’s group also helped persuade New York’s legislature to grant drivers’ licenses to illegals — so freeing many to join the labor force of delivery drivers.

The demand by investors for endless migrant labor has created a new thing: The US-India Outsourcing Economy. This no-regulation zone redirects new wealth into a few cities & a small elite. Elites want to expand it, so US college-grads get #HR1044. http://bit.ly/2LpqAmx

Booker’s televised support for low-skilled immigration also sought to paint an elitist gloss on Biden’s call for higher-skilled migration.

But there is little or no evidence that a President Biden would want to reduce lower-skilled immigration. During the TV debate, for example, Biden described Americans’ homeland as “a country of immigrants.” He continued by crediting immigrants — not skilled immigrants — with creating America, not Americans:

We should … [and] I proposed, significantly increasing the number of legal immigrants who are able to come. This country can tolerate a heck of a lot more people. And the reason we’re the country we are is we’ve been able to cherry-pick from the best of every culture. Immigrants built this country.

…

Some here came against their will; others came because they in fact thought they could fundamentally change their lives … That’s what made us great.

Also, Biden strongly supported the 2013 “Gang of Eight” bill, which would have amnestied all illegals. It would also have doubled legal immigration to two million a year — or one migrant for every two American births. That resulting flood of labor would have shifted more of the nation’s new wealth from employees over to investors, according to a 2013 study of the bill by the Congressional Budget Office. “The rate of return on capital would be higher [than on labor] under the legislation than under current law throughout the next two decades,” says the report, titled “The Economic Impact of S. 744.”

Each year, roughly four million young Americans join the workforce after graduating from high school or university. This total includes roughly 800,000 Americans who graduate with skilled degrees in business or healthcare, engineering or science, software or statistics.

But the federal government then imports about 1.1 million legal immigrants and refreshes a resident population of roughly 1.5 million white-collar visa workers — including approximately 1 million H-1B workers and spouses —plus roughly 500,000 blue-collar visa workers.

The government also prints out more than one million work permits for foreigners, tolerates about eight million illegal workers, and does not punish companies for employing the hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants who sneak across the border or overstay their legal visas each year.

This policy of inflating the labor supply boosts economic growth for investors because it transfers wages to investors and ensures that employers do not have to compete for American workers by offering higher wages and better working conditions.

This policy of flooding the market with cheap, foreign, white-collar graduates and blue-collar labor also shifts enormous wealth from young employees towards older investors, even as it also widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, and hurts children’s schools and college educations.

The cheap-labor economic strategy also pushes Americans away from high-tech careers and sidelines millions of marginalized Americans, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.

“If there is a growing flood of foreign labor, the American middle class is no longer going to exist, and Republicans will not have a constituency,” said Hilarie Gamm, a co-cofounder of the American Workers Coalition.

President Donald Trump’s citizenship director told a Texas business group that House Speaker Paul Ryan “submarined” the best chance for immigration reform because he wanted illegal immigration.

“Let’s not forget … when [Rep.] Paul Ryan was the speaker, Paul Ryan submarined the best opportunity we had legislatively when [judiciary chairman Rep.] Bob Goodlatte’s bill … came through,” Ken Cuccinelli told the Texas Public Policy Foundation on August 22.

Cuccinelli, who is the acting director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency, said, “We had leadership there that defended the status quo. They were the Chamber of Commerce Congress. They wanted illegal immigration.”

In contrast, President Trump is following through on his promises and is giving American voters a clear choice in 2020, he said:

I actually think the 2020 election can help solve that problem. I believe when you run on things, and people know ‘This is what I get if I vote for X, if this party becomes the majority, I get this bill’ …. [then you get] good politics and good policy.

“Not enough people will challenge their own leadership in the GOP to beat them down when they are wrong,” said Cuccinelli, a populist conservative from Virginia.

Goodlatte retired from Congress in 2018. In December, he said that Ryan blocked his bill by dividing the GOP votes between two reform bills: “That is just not a good strategyand I complained about it at the time. I said ‘You’ve got to narrow this down to one bill and then work really hard to get the members to vote for that one bill.’”

Ryan said in November 2018 that he preferred a rival bill, sponsored by GOP Rep. Chris Curbelo, who was defeated in the November election.

On immigration, I really liked—I call it “the Curbelo bill,” it was Goodlatte II — the immigration compromise bill that I put on the floor in July, which satisfied the President’s four pillars.” he said.

“Our goal is to not cut legal immigration,” Rep. Carlos Curbelo told RollCall.com on June 2018. The number of illegals who get green cards from the amnesty should be “as high a number as possible,” he said.

Curbelo repeated his demand, telling TheHill.com that “some visas may be shifted towards employment visas, but our goal is to not cut legal immigration.”

The Goodlatte bill would have cut legal immigration by ending the visa lottery, provided a work permit amnesty to just the 700,000 illegals who are registered in the DACA program, and ensured immigration cuts, said Rosemary Jenks, policy director of NumbersUSA.

It also included much careful language to hinder fraud and to prevent pro-migration judges from hijacking the bill’s limited amnesty for their own goals, said Jenks, who opposed the bigger Ryan bill.

Ryan’s support for the Curbelo bill allowed 41 GOP legislators to vote no on the Goodlatte bill when it came up for a June vote.

“If it has been the only bill offered, it might have passed,” Goodlatte said. “We were 20, 21 votes short,” said Goodlatte. The [bill] would have passed “if we had gotten half of [the GOP ‘no’ voters] to join with us, we would have gotten there,” he said.

The US has a fast-growing population of roughly 630,000 illegal migrants from India, mixed among the temporary contract-work population of at least 1.5 million Indians. That's great for business & govt's, but bad for Americans' families & employees. http://bit.ly/2zfNggO

Immigration is a government economic strategy which seeks to stimulate economic growth and stock prices by inflating the supply of labor and consumers.

Each year, roughly four million young Americans join the workforce after graduating from high school or university. This total includes about 800,000 Americans who graduate with skilled degrees in business or health care, engineering or science, software, or statistics.

But the federal government then imports about 1.1 million legal immigrants and refreshes a resident population of roughly 1.5 million white-collar visa workers — including approximately 1 million H-1B workers and spouses — and about 500,000 blue-collar visa workers. The government also prints out more than one million work permits for foreigners, tolerates about eight million illegal workers, and rarely punishes companies for employing the hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants who sneak across the border or overstay their legal visas each year.

This policy of inflating the new labor supply boosts stock values for investors by ensuring that employers do not have to compete in a free market for American workers with offers of higher wages and better working conditions.

This policy of flooding the market with cheap, foreign, white-collar graduates and blue-collar labor shifts enormous wealth from young employees towards older investors, even as it also widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, and hurts children’s schools and college educations.

The cheap-labor economic strategy also pushes Americans away from high-tech careers and sidelines millions of marginalized Americans, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.

2020 Census Citizenship Controversy Exposes True Open Borders Agenda

As usual, the dustup about the census including a question about citizenship has nothing to do with what the loony left claims as their motivation to exclude it. They say it’s all about being sensitive to the hurt feelings and paranoia of people who are illegally present in the U.S. And, by the way, asking the question it is not a Donald Trump trick to ferret out those folks who are hiding under their blankets, afraid that the next knock on the door will be the jackbooted ICE agents, come to drag them from their beds and put them on boxcars headed for concentration camps.

A brief history lesson here. The Constitution of the United States directs the President to conduct a Census every ten years, and that has been done without controversy since 1790. And with rare exceptions, the question on citizenship has been part of it from the beginning. Yet, its inclusion in the 2020 Census has become controversial. The reasons for the opposition to the citizenship question tell us a lot about the declining health of our American constitutional republic.

The vehement opposition to the 2020 Census question on citizenship is a symptom of a deep divide in the body politic, a chasm that only grows wider and deeper as politicians postpone a decision over the meaning of the Constitution's opening words, "We the People."

There is a chasm as wide as the Grand Canyon separating individuals who believe that "We the People" means we the citizens of the United States and those who believe it means, we the global citizens who temporarily inhabit this territory. To one group having an accurate count of both citizens and noncitizens resident in each state is vital to the constitutional purposes of the Census, but to the "global citizen" contingent that count is not only unnecessary, it is slanderous, racist and, well -- undemocratic!

It is important to understand that this debate over the 2020 Census's citizen/noncitizen numbers is not a debate over counting illegal immigrants residing in the United States. This controversy goes deeper than the debate over whether the official U.S. Census estimate of 11.3 million illegal aliens resident in the country is accurate or woefully inaccurate.

The political resistance to the traditional citizenship question as part of the decennial Census derives its passion and intensity from the ideological goal of transforming the nature of political representation in our republic. In that world, an elected representative in any city council, school board, county commission, state legislature, Board of Regents, or the U. .Congress, is duty bound to represent any resident of his or her district with the same passion and integrity whether that resident be a citizen, a Chinese or German foreign student at a local university, a legal resident alien born in Egypt or an illegal alien who swam across the Rio Grande. Should foreign students at the University of Colorado vote in Boulder city elections? Why not, if every "person" is entitled to "equal representation"?

The population count produced by the 2020 Census will be the foundation for Congress' adoption of revised apportionment of the 435 seats in Congress. Does a new apportionment based on new Census numbers mean a count based on all persons, all citizens, or something else? Such questions will be debated in Congress and litigated all the way to the Supreme Court before we know the answers, but the debate must begin with an accurate count in the Census. Will we get one?

When the national debate over illegal immigration and border security was heating up back in 2005 and 2006 in response to amnesty proposals in Congress, I was roundly criticized for suggesting the opposition to amnesty was rooted in opposition to secure borders. I was attacked by some prominent leaders of the Republican Party for saying that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce saw illegal aliens as cheap labor and the Democrat Party saw them as future Democratic voters.I take no pleasure in observing in 2019 that Democratic leaders in Congress are aggressively advocating open borders as a path to a permanent Democratic majority. And there is an even bigger picture that elitist leftists are trying to paint for us all. They want no borders, no allegiance to a nation state, no citizenship classification connected to a single country.

They want a kumbaya world of global citizens that can be governed by people who “know better.” Think I am wrong? Try to find a recent college or high school grad who can tell you what it means to be an American other than by saying it means abiding in a place called America. The members of what I call the Cult of Multiculturalism infect our schools, our media, and pop culture. The philosophy permeates the West -- its repercussions and can be seen playing out all over Europe.

Only a short decade ago, a world-famous Harvard political scientist, Samuel P. Huntington, wrote a landmark book aptly titled Who Are We? America’s National Identity Crisis. He believed that America's unprecedented achievements and unparalleled prosperity had their foundation in our nation's European heritage, a heritage under siege by the formidable forces of multiculturalism. So eliminating the citizenship question in the Census is a just another step down the road to the elitist utopia promised by Marx and Engels.

Eventually we will come to the step when jackbooted government agents really will be pulling people out of their beds and sending them off to “re-education” camps.” After all, some people might resist the America that Barack Obama promised to thoroughly transform.

Former U.S. Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), serves as Advisory Board Member for We Build The Wall. He was author of the famous Bush Era book called In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America's Border and Security.

House Democrats and 39 Republicans passed a plan to provide asylum in the United States to potentially millions of Venezuelans fleeing their socialist dictator.

In a 272 to 158 House vote on Thursday, every Democrat and 39 Republicans voted to create a Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program for Venezuela’s population — allowing nationals who are already in the U.S. to remain and incentivizing more to migrate.

Officials with the Trump administration previously voiced their opposition to the plan in an interview with Breitbart News.

“We would not want to open the floodgates for them,” an official said in March.

Leading the opposition against giving TPS to Venezuela’s population, Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) called the plan an effort to continue current U.S. national immigration policy that acts as “the world’s orphanage for children and adults alike.”

Brooks said:

This bill proposes a tsunami of people coming to our country who are ill-equipped to support themselves. And, let’s put that into the perspective of where we are a nation. We just blew through the $22 trillion debt mark earlier this year. This year, we are looking at a roughly $900 billion deficit. A deal that has been reached that will only increase our deficit by $2 trillion over the next two years pushing our debt up to $22 trillion. This is money we do not have, have to borrow to get, and cannot afford to pay back. [Emphasis added]

How does that relate to H.R. 549? Well, let me share some numbers with you. Sixty percent of households with a lawful immigrant in them are on welfare, living off the hard work of others. Seventy percent of illegal alien households are on welfare, living off the hard work of others here in the United States of America. [Emphasis added]

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a major donor the to the GOP establishment, urged Republicans to join Democrats in helping to pass TPS for Venezuelans.

“The Chamber applauds Representatives Soto and Diaz-Balart for leading the House effort to pass H.R. 549, which would allow many Venezuelans currently in the U.S. the opportunity to legally remain and work in the U.S. while Venezuela is in a state of crisis,” the Chamber’s Neil Bradley said in a statement. “The U.S. government should make it clear that Venezuelan nationals who pose no risk to the safety or security of the U.S. will not be sent back into harm’s way.”

TPS has become a quasi-amnesty for otherwise illegal aliens created under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990 (INA) that prevents the deportation of foreign nationals from countries that have suffered through famine, war, or natural disasters. Since the Clinton administration, TPS has been transformed into a de facto amnesty program as the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations have continuously renewed the program for a variety of countries.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

TRUMP’S CRAP ON BORDERS AND HIS PRETEND WALL IS ONLY ONE MORE TRUMP HOAX!

*

Only a complete fool would believe that Trump is any more for American Legal workers than the Democrat Party for Billionaires and Banksters!

The latest ad from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) asks Trump to reject the mass illegal and legal immigration policies supported by Wall Street, corporate executives, and most specifically, the GOP mega-donor Koch brothers.

*

Efforts by the big business lobby, Chamber of Commerce, Koch brothers, and George W. Bush Center include increasing employment-based legal immigration that would likely crush the historic wage gains that Trump has delivered for America’s blue collar and working class citizens.

*

A handful of Republican and Democrat lawmakers are continuing to tout a plan that gives amnesty to nearly a million illegal aliens in exchange for some amount of funding for President Trump’s proposed border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

MAGA vs. the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

The general public typically equates the Chamber of Commerce with local Mom and Pop businesses in their area which meet for networking and mutual support in local chapters across the country. This is erroneous. According to theHill:

While local chambers cater to the needs of car dealers and restaurant owners, the national Chamber operates as the lobbying arm of large corporations that have never met a big government program they did not like.

They are weapons dealers pushing billion-dollar battleships and telecommunication lobbyists protecting slow Internet at the world's highest prices. They are lobbyists for pharmaceutical companies, big banks, and Wall street traders who treat the American people as gullibles to be fleeced without mercy.

Even seasoned politicians are susceptible to having misconceptions about the Chamber. Former U.S. senator Jim Demint admits he naively thought it was lobbying for free enterprise and creating a better business environment for everybody. Now he says, "I pronounce them part of the swamp." Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich), a conservative, adds, "I believe in free markets and am against cronyism and corporate welfare, and they [the U.S. Chamber of Commerce] support those things."

So what is the USCC? It is a business lobbying group that represents 80% of the Fortune 100 companies and is by far the largest interest group in Washington. According the Wall Street Journal, the Chamber spent $125 million in lobbying in 2014 and $95 million last year. This dwarfs the spending of any other interest group. One tactic the Chamber uses to swell its revenue is to solicit money from big international companies to promote specific goals. Since donor names are not public, the Chamber can pursue controversial fights without identifying the firms behind the effort.

The Chamber of Commerce and its president Thomas Donohue came into conflict with Donald Trump and his America First platform very early on. For 18 months during the runup to the 2016 election, the Chamber spared no effort to demonize Trump. In doing so, the Chamber was carrying water for the Hillary Clinton campaign. Donohue and company figured they could better deal with Hillary than Trump in the Oval Office. In this, the Chamber was exactly right.

The big hangups the Chamber and its client base had against Donald Trump involved immigration, trade, and tariffs. Adhering to its corporate masters’ call for a continuous supply of cheap labor, the Chamber lobbies for more immigration and resists tight border controls. Trade is much the same. Past trade pacts have allowed Wall Street to grow obscenely rich in the outsourcing of American jobs to third-world countries for sake of the bottom line of the multinationals. In the process, over a million ordinary Americans were left holding the bag.

All this is still playing out today. The president is striving to adjust the unfair trading arrangements that the political class, in cahoots with the big money interests on Wall Street, have saddled the U.S. with. But Trump and his trade team of Robert Lighthizer, Wilbur Ross, Steven Mnuchin, and Larry Kudlow are fighting not just China, but what is effectively a Fifth Column here at home. It's composed of the likes of the Chamber of Commerce and a sizable portion of the political establishment, which is used to dipping its beak in special-interest money.

As to this latter point, just look at the breaking news of the dealings of Joe Biden's son, Hunter, with the Chinese government. Writing in the New YorkPost, Peter Schweizer outlines in detail the $1.5 private equity deal the younger Biden made with the Chinese while Biden was vice-president. And now, Joe Biden is out on the stump soft-peddling the damage China has done to the U.S. economy and downplaying its threat to us and pretending to be for the working man. You can't make this up.

It's important not to conflate Big Business (Wall Street) with small business (Main Street). Wall Street is the financial economy. It pushes paper around. For example, they write derivatives on real assets, say stocks, to the point where the value of derivatives traded is far greater than the assets they are based on.Investopedia says this: "The derivatives market is, in a word, gigantic -- often estimated at more than $1.2 quadrillion on the high end."

A quadrillion is 1,000 trillion. In dollar terms, a quadrillion is 15-times the GDP of the entire world.

Main Street actually makes and sells things. For over a generation or more, Big Biz has dominated Main Street. This is why the Midwest and other places across the U.S. are littered with closed factories and why middle-class wages stagnated. In many ways, the financial economy is parasitic on the real economy. In the 2016 election, Donald Trump represented Main Street while Clinton was in the pocket of the big money interests on Wall Street.

What this means is that what is good for Main Street will not be good for Wall Street and Big Biz, at least not in the short run. What benefits the American worker -- fair trade policy and tight immigration control -- will initially hurt Big Biz and Wall Street. And the hurt will continue until the financial economy is scaled back to its proper size and is no longer allowed to the tail that wags the American economic dog. Until then, MAGA is at war with Big Biz and the bought-and-paid-for political establishment. And this explains much of the resistance to Trump's tariffs and trade position.

A closing observation says a lot. Thomas Donohue, the president of the Chamber of Commerce, is 80 years old. His board is pushing him to retire. The replacement they are looking at is former Congressman Paul Ryan. A perfect fit given the Chamber's agenda.

Chamber of Commerce Demands More Immigration: ‘U.S. Is Out of People’

The United States Chamber of Commerce is vowing to continue fighting President Trump’s shaping of the Republican Party into a pro-U.S. worker party of blue collar working and middle class Americans.

In an interview with the Washington Post, numerous Chamber of Commerce officials said the organization’s corporate lobbying efforts would soon attempt to court more elected Democrats to support their economic libertarian agenda of more free trade and increased legal immigration.

“The GOP’s drift toward protectionism, nativism, and isolationism since Donald Trump took over the party in 2016 is also at odds with the Chamber’s longtime support for expanding free trade, growing legal immigration and investing in infrastructure,” the Poststory details.

Specifically, Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Tom Donahue said the U.S. needed more legal immigration so that corporations and business secure a never-ending flow of cheaper labor, claiming the country is “out of people.”

And they’re still looking to work with Trump even on areas where they’re not really in agreement, such as immigration. The Chamber advocates for protecting the “dreamers” from deportation and expanding rates of legal immigration. “The fundamental issue is that the United States of America is out of people,” said Donohue. “We have the lowest unemployment we’ve had in 65 years. We have brought more people back into the workforce and still have the lowest unemployment.” [Emphasis added]

Despite Donahue’s claims, at least 12 million Americans who want full-time jobs remain on the sidelines of the workforce. This includes 6.2 million Americans who are unemployed that want a job, 4.5 million Americans who are underemployed working part-time jobs, and 1.4 million Americans who continue to be entirely out of the workforce though they want full-time employment.

While millions remain on the sidelines of the workforce, the Chamber of Commerce has routinely advocated for increasing legal immigration levels as a boon to corporations while depressing job prospects and wages for America’s working and middle class. Already, about 1.5 million illegal and legal immigrants are admitted to the country every year, to the detriment of U.S. wages.

The Chamber of Commerce’s push to increase legal immigration levels is vastly out of step with Republican voters and American voters as a whole. Last year, nearly two-out-threeU.S. voters said they supported reducing legal immigration, while most recently about 43 percent of Republican voters said immigration hurts the country.

Extensive research by economists like George Borjas and analyst Steven Camarota has found that the country’s current mass legal immigration system — wherein 1.2 million mostly low-skilled workers are admitted annually — burdens U.S. taxpayers and America’s working and middle class while redistributing about $500 billion in wealth every year to major employers and newly arrived immigrants.

Borjas has previously called the country’s legal immigration system the “largest anti-poverty program” in the world at the expense of blue-collar Americans and middle-class taxpayers.

Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, has found that every one-percent increase in the immigrant composition of American workers’ occupations reduces their weekly wages by about 0.5 percent. This means the average native-born American worker today has his weekly wages reduced by perhaps 8.5 percent because of current legal immigration levels.

In a state like Florida, where immigrants make up about 25.4 percent of the labor force, American workers have their weekly wages reduced by about 12.5 percent. In California, where immigrants make up 34 percent of the labor force, American workers’ weekly wages are reduced by potentially 17 percent.

Likewise, every one-percent increase in the immigrant composition of low-skilled U.S. occupations reduces wages by about 0.8 percent. Should 15 percent of low-skilled jobs be held by foreign-born workers, it would reduce the wages of native-born American workers by perhaps 12 percent.

Though corporate interests and the open borders lobby have sought to sway Trump from his “America First” illegal and legal immigration agenda, senior advisor Jared Kushner recently said the president’s top priority in terms of the White House’s reform efforts is protecting Americans’ wages.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

///

Chamber of Commerce Considering Legal Action to Block Mexico Tariffs

AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

JOHN CARNEY

31 May 2019634

1:44

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups are considering ways to challenge the new tariffs on goods imported from Mexico.

The powerful U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which advocates for cheap labor policies and opposes American First trade initiatives, told reporters Friday that it is considering all options, including legal challenges, to thwart the Trump administration’s policy.

“We have no choice but to pursue every option available to push back,” Neil Bradley, executive vice president and chief policy officer at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said Friday.

President Donald Trump said Thursday that he will impose a 5 percent tariff on goods imported from Mexico if the Mexican government does not stem the flow of illegal immigrants from Central America.

Chamber of Commerce President and chief executive Tom Donahue told the Washington Post in April that the U.S. needed more legal immigration because the country is “out of people.” The chamber has pushed for legal protection for so-called “Dreamers” and led political resistance to efforts to deport more illegal border crossers.

The chamber began 2019 by opposing legislation that would have allowed President Donald Trump to impose reciprocal tariffs on specific foreign imports.

“The bill would effectively give the President unilateral authority to increase U.S. tariffs on imports from any foreign country,” Bradley wrote in a letter sent to many lawmakers on Capitol Hill. “The harm to Americans would be immediate: Tariffs are taxes, and they are paid by American families and American businesses.”

Sen. Cory Booker called for more low-skilled immigration Wednesday night as he tried to cut down Joe Biden in the Democrats’ 2020 race.

“I heard the vice president say that if you got a PhD., you can come right into this country,” Booker said, adding:

Well that’s playing into what the Republicans want, to pit some immigrants against other immigrants. We need to reform this whole immigration system and begin to be the country that says everyone has worth and dignity and this should be a country that honors everyone.

If implemented, Booker’s call for more low-skilled immigration would increase competition for blue-collar jobs and cheap apartments in New Jersey, so imposing additional economic pain on lower-skilled Americans in Booker’s home state. More migration would also add to the divide-and-rule diversity which hinders Americans from periodically uniting to curb the elites’ self-serving policies.

Republicans want to pit some immigrants against others. But we need to reform this whole immigration system and begin to be the country that says, “Everyone has worth and dignity, and this should be a country that honors everyone.” #DemDebate

Booker’s call for un-skilled immigration got plaudits from advocates for “diverse” immigration into the United States.

“That was solid immigration talk from Booker,” said Alex Merced, the “Latinx Vice Chair” of the Libertarian Party. “Merit based immigration is condescending and presumes government can determine our individual potential, I sure as hell don’t trust government to do that.”

“Booker speaking truth again on immigration,” tweeted Jonathan Capeheart, a member of the Washington Post‘s editorial board.

But Booker’s call for more unskilled immigration also got him a shout-out from Todd Schulte, who runs FWD.us, a cheap labor lobby shop for Mark Zuckerberg and other West Coast investors.

“Appreciate @CoryBooker,” said a tweet from Schulte. “Pointing out that this [immigration] section of the debate is being dominated by poor assumptions, bad framing and a lack of focus on many of the most critical aspects of immigration — not cutesy gotcha stuff that misses huge aspects of the debate.”

Schulte’s donors employ many foreign graduates, including both visa workers and immigrants. But his donors also have coherent economic reasons to oppose any cutbacks to the immigration of unskilled workers and family chain migrants, as urged by President Donald Trump’s 2018 “Four Pillars” plan.

Unskilled migrants serve as both cheap workers, extra consumers, and predictable renters. Their multi-sided value for investors is spotlighted by FWD.us’ support for DoorDash, which hires people to deliver food by auto, scooters, and bikes. In a September 2018 statement, the FWD.us investors denounced Trump’s plan to cut unskilled immigration into the United States, saying it would reduce immigrant-driven economic growth:

Immigration powers the American economy, and ensuring that immigrant families living here today can thrive means greater benefits for all U.S. residents and our children in the future. The earning potential of immigrants and their contributions to the labor-force and economy grows over time and over generations …

Tony Xu, the founder of DoorDash, embodies this story … in 2013 Tony founded DoorDash, an incredibly successful meal delivery service. Today, DoorDash is valued at $4 billion, using recent investment to expand into 1,200 new cities and to hire 250 new employees, in addition to over 100,000 part-time gigs already created for delivery drivers across the country.

DoorDash’s investors in FWD.us funders include Sequoia Capital, KPCB, SV Angel, CRV, and Y Combinator. In June 2019, Schulte’s group also helped persuade New York’s legislature to grant drivers’ licenses to illegals — so freeing many to join the labor force of delivery drivers.

The demand by investors for endless migrant labor has created a new thing: The US-India Outsourcing Economy. This no-regulation zone redirects new wealth into a few cities & a small elite. Elites want to expand it, so US college-grads get #HR1044. http://bit.ly/2LpqAmx

Booker’s televised support for low-skilled immigration also sought to paint an elitist gloss on Biden’s call for higher-skilled migration.

But there is little or no evidence that a President Biden would want to reduce lower-skilled immigration. During the TV debate, for example, Biden described Americans’ homeland as “a country of immigrants.” He continued by crediting immigrants — not skilled immigrants — with creating America, not Americans:

We should … [and] I proposed, significantly increasing the number of legal immigrants who are able to come. This country can tolerate a heck of a lot more people. And the reason we’re the country we are is we’ve been able to cherry-pick from the best of every culture. Immigrants built this country.

…

Some here came against their will; others came because they in fact thought they could fundamentally change their lives … That’s what made us great.

Also, Biden strongly supported the 2013 “Gang of Eight” bill, which would have amnestied all illegals. It would also have doubled legal immigration to two million a year — or one migrant for every two American births. That resulting flood of labor would have shifted more of the nation’s new wealth from employees over to investors, according to a 2013 study of the bill by the Congressional Budget Office. “The rate of return on capital would be higher [than on labor] under the legislation than under current law throughout the next two decades,” says the report, titled “The Economic Impact of S. 744.”

Each year, roughly four million young Americans join the workforce after graduating from high school or university. This total includes roughly 800,000 Americans who graduate with skilled degrees in business or healthcare, engineering or science, software or statistics.

But the federal government then imports about 1.1 million legal immigrants and refreshes a resident population of roughly 1.5 million white-collar visa workers — including approximately 1 million H-1B workers and spouses —plus roughly 500,000 blue-collar visa workers.

The government also prints out more than one million work permits for foreigners, tolerates about eight million illegal workers, and does not punish companies for employing the hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants who sneak across the border or overstay their legal visas each year.

This policy of inflating the labor supply boosts economic growth for investors because it transfers wages to investors and ensures that employers do not have to compete for American workers by offering higher wages and better working conditions.

This policy of flooding the market with cheap, foreign, white-collar graduates and blue-collar labor also shifts enormous wealth from young employees towards older investors, even as it also widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, and hurts children’s schools and college educations.

The cheap-labor economic strategy also pushes Americans away from high-tech careers and sidelines millions of marginalized Americans, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.

“If there is a growing flood of foreign labor, the American middle class is no longer going to exist, and Republicans will not have a constituency,” said Hilarie Gamm, a co-cofounder of the American Workers Coalition.